Midfield Vs Key Position

[Willo]

Willo, based on the stats we've been discussing, our:

-forward line in pretty good (although the decline since Richo has been inured is significant)
-midfield is just below average (based on both inside 50 differential and clearances)
-defense is terrible

But our key players in our forward line are old (Richo, Brownie) but our backs, particularly our KPPs, are young.

In short my feel is we are long way off having a complete team, so best available player as long as it isn't a specialist KPP defender, but I'd really like a tough inside mid to help at the stoppages.

We also need a:
-plan B Richo succession plan if Steamer doesn't turn out
-plan A for replacing Simmo
-mid-small defender who can actually defend (maybe from converting someone already on the list)
-crumbing forward

the list goes on...

So a Hurley is excess to requirements as a 1st pick? Inside mid 1st up..Hartlett, Ziebell perhaps
then fill kpf and a ruckman to follow? Depend on how many picks/trades we do I guess.

I thought GM at a function said we'd go kp 1st up. I guess that changes with who's available.

 

[Col.E.Kurtz]

So a Hurley is excess to requirements as a 1st pick? Inside mid 1st up..Hartlett, Ziebell perhaps
then fill kpf and a ruckman to follow? Depend on how many picks/trades we do I guess.

I thought GM at a function said we'd go kp 1st up. I guess that changes with who's available.

Others make a good case for Hurely, but I just see it as our least area of need given we have some decent players there already and behind them are Rance and Gourdis.

On the other hand, on a purely statistical basis our defense is bad, so that supports drafting Hurley, but the guys who have been killing us are the smaller backs.

I reckon we have enough holes elsewhere that we can still take best available, KPP forward or mid.

 

[IanG]

On the other hand, on a purely statistical basis our defense is bad, so that supports drafting Hurley, but the guys who have been killing us are the smaller backs.

Yup the stats would be due to smaller forwards IMHO. Sloane from Metro was a good small back, hopefully we should be able to pick up him or someone like him later in the draft.

 

[Scoop]

If we draft well rounded footballers who know how to kick and have a semi decent size to them then everyone will get better around them. Class and bulk in the midfield for me and do not draft any more unskilled pencils.

 

[the claw]

If we draft well rounded footballers who know how to kick and have a semi decent size to them then everyone will get better around them. Class and bulk in the midfield for me and do not draft any more unskilled pencils.

agree but if hurley is there at around pick 8 or 10 i would not hesitate to take him. he is not just a back man hes versatile and can play either end.

 

[the claw]

just to add to what i was saying earlier in the thread. west coast are going into their game on the weekend without their regular fb, chb, and third defensive tall option. they will play mackenzie at chb at 196cm. schofield at 195cm. wilkes at 194cm. and sphanger at 193. they have had some games and have been getting some good grounding at wafl. along with graham staker as defensive options and perhaps lynch they can at least cover these losses structurally. if we were to lose thursfield mcguane and schulz we dont have one young player who could step up only rance. and with mcguane and schulz do we have afl standard regulars to start with.this is what list management is about.

ive often said 6 kpds 6kpfs 4 ruckmen with the odd rookie or 3. imo you need a minimum of 10 to 12 at afl standard for when injury strikes.

 

[Col.E.Kurtz]

just to add to what i was saying earlier in the thread. west coast are going into their game on the weekend without their regular fb, chb, and third defensive tall option. they will play mackenzie at chb at 196cm. schofield at 195cm. wilkes at 194cm. and sphanger at 193. they have had some games and have been getting some good grounding at wafl. along with graham staker as defensive options and perhaps lynch they can at least cover these losses structurally. if we were to lose thursfield mcguane and schulz we dont have one young player who could step up only rance. and with mcguane and schulz do we have afl standard regulars to start with.this is what list management is about.

ive often said 6 kpds 6kpfs 4 ruckmen with the odd rookie or 3. imo you need a minimum of 10 to 12 at afl standard for when injury strikes.

Clawsta for the WCE game we didn’t have our FB (thirsty), our best key foward (Richo) and our swing CHF/CHB (Polak) out and we still didn’t need to play Rance or Sylvester. I’m not saying we don’t need more quality talls, but injury has struck and we managed